Although I admit that I perhaps shouldn't be too worried about reports by a media that has trouble getting Iraq right.
The British say that Basra is fine:
Much has been written in recent weeks about conditions in the south, and in particular the significant challenges Basra still faces. These challenges are real, wide-ranging and deep-seated. U.K. troops have continued to provide overall security and maintain the capability to strike against the militias. We continue to play a key role in southern Iraq, contributing to securing supply routes to Baghdad, training and mentoring Iraqi security forces, and building the capacity of the Iraqi border force. In particular, we have trained an Iraqi army division (more than 13,000 men) that is increasingly capable and has this year made an important contribution to the drive to improve security.
The U.K.-led provincial reconstruction team in Basra has helped build the capacity of the provincial council to govern effectively. We have helped repair critical infrastructure and generate employment, including the regeneration of the historically palm-based agricultural industry.
Commanders on the ground expect that Basra province will in months, not years, be judged to have met the conditions for transfer to full Iraqi security control. As with each of the seven Iraqi provinces already transferred -- four in areas of Iraq previously controlled by U.S.-led forces, three in the south in the U.K.-led area of operations -- the final decision will be taken by the Iraqi government, in consultation with the U.S. commander of the multinational force, based on the conditions on the ground.
I am not entirely comforted about Basra. But if the British aren't going to bug out without our agreement that the province is ready for Iraqi control, I feel a little better that we won't have to move a brigade or two south to preserve our supply lines.
The British won't just leave, will they?
UPDATE: Well, the British have just pulled out of Basra. And I'm not crazy to have concerns for our line of supply:
With the British drawdown, U.S. and Iraqi authorities have expressed concern about the land supply line from Kuwait to Baghdad and beyond and security of the oil fields — until now under the eye of British troops.
This is the first direct report I've seen on the line of supply issue. We shall see if Iraqi security force can handle the Shia militia threats and if the small remaining British force of about a brigade can handle the security on the supply line.
UPDATE: LTG Odierno says we are contemplating sending troops south if the British pull out:
But questioned about the implications for the US military if British troops were withdrawn entirely from southern Iraq, General Odierno pointedly listed Britain’s continuing responsibilities there - maintaining a headquarters in the region, training Iraqi security forces, supporting the coalition’s political work, securing supply routes to the rest of Iraq and providing quick reaction forces. “There are still several missions we need them to do down there and we have laid it out for them,” he said.
“We believe right now that the British forces will stay there in some size. That’s what we have been told so far.”
But he acknowledged that a general election was looming, and disclosed that the US had drawn up contingency plans in case Mr Brown decided to withdraw the entire force: “One could be that we do allow the Iraqis to do most of it and don’t send anyone else down there. One could be that we send some forces down there.”
Of course, he is paid to think about these things. But our supply line is crucial. And as always, the concern over our supply lines that could make us commit troops to the Basra region should highlight the utter folly of pulling all our forces into Kurdish regions. The latter is pure drooling idiocy as far as I'm concerned.
